Roundball Mining Company » Nik Stauskashttp://www.roundballminingcompany.com
We'll move the earth for a title!Sun, 29 Mar 2015 06:26:46 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.12014 NBA Draft: Three sleeper picks for the Nuggetshttp://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/06/24/2014-nba-draft-three-sleeper-picks-for-the-nuggets/
http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/06/24/2014-nba-draft-three-sleeper-picks-for-the-nuggets/#commentsWed, 25 Jun 2014 02:00:33 +0000http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/?p=8980The draft is just two days away, and with it comes the beginning of a new NBA season in earnest. We’ve already covered the basics pretty extensively — with a full roster hopefully returning to health, the Nuggets don’t have a ton of room to add prospects. Bearing that limited (immediate) flexibility in mind, it’s important to zero in on how the Nuggets can best improve with their lottery pick. We’ve already done some detailed analysis of this year’s crop of shooting guards – a strong group in this draft which just happens to line up with Denver’s biggest need.

My personal big board still goes Harris, Stausaks, and LaVine; but with trade rumors swirling and so many scenarios up in the air, it pays to expect the unexpected. Here’s a look at three possible sleepers who just might end up being the newest Denver Nuggets.

Dario Saric, SF, KK Cibona (International)

Saric is the least sleeper-ish of this group as Kalen already delved into him as part of an earlier prospecting feature. However, Saric warrants a closer look as recent reports had him linked to the Nuggets before he decided stay in Europe for two more seasons.

For those unfamiliar with Saric’s situation, this isn’t the first time he’s changed his tune on making the jump to the NBA. He was entered in last years draft, and would have been a likely lottery pick, but unexpectedly pulled his name out weeks before the 2013 draft. There was some hope he was ready to come over now after a huge season of growth and development with KK Cedevita, but he opted to move to a big club in Europe instead. His new deal with Turkish team Anadolu Efes precludes him from joining the NBA til 2016.

That’s a long time to wait for any team, which probably makes him not only available to the Nuggets but maybe even a reach at number 11.

However, Saric is still the same player, a consensus top-10 talent widely regarded as the best Euro prospect in quite some time. Watching him carve up the competition in the Adriatic league finals, it was clear to me he’s a very unique player. It’s rare to find a prospect with so many tools, European or otherwise. At 6-10 he has great size and versatile all-around skills with few obvious weaknesses. This is not a “development guy” in the way so many young Euros are – he’s already a proven pro in a solid league.

Who knows what the Nuggets will look like in two years time, but Tim Connelly has been clear that he wants to win now. Using Denver’s first lottery pick in a decade to essentially punt this draft would be tough, but the Nuggets may view themselves as a team that can afford to be patient for a big-time talent like Saric. After the 2015-16 season, the only player signed is Ty Lawson. Denver has a ton of room to acquire picks and assets until then and adding Saric on top of all that flexibility could be a gamble that pays off huge.

If you were to ask me to name the best prospect available at number 11 from a pure talent perspective, Saric is at the top of my list. At the same time, waiting two years for a guy who has already waffled so much doesn’t look like a sure thing at all. Right now, Saric is a good fallback option if the Nuggets feel the 11th pick cannot get them a significant upgrade right away. I’d be fine taking a risk for the future, but this pick probably means the Nuggets’ bold plans for big improvement this summer fell through.

Doug McDermott, SF/PF, Creighton (Senior)

McDermott is another top 10 prospect we’ve glossed over but haven’t given serious consideration to as an option for Denver. Were Stauskas not in the draft, McDermott would be the consensus best shooter available. Even so, he’s already generated a ton of buzz with the Hornets reportedly zeroing in on him at number nine. However, should Charlotte pass, that puts Doug McBuckets right in the Nuggets lap as a viable candidate at number 11.

Tim Connelly and his staff watched him workout in Chicago, and if they are considering McDermott it is undoubtedly for his one elite skill: three-point shooting. McDermott not only has fluid mechanics but he knows how to get his shot off efficiently, even with defenses keyed in on shutting him down.

McDermott probably lacks a true position in the NBA and gives up lots on the defensive end, but he seems like a lock to be a solid role player and shoot north of 40% from three. His fundamentals and high IQ make him an interesting fit for Brian Shaw, who was obviously a big proponent of the triangle offense in the past. If the Nuggets want to move their squad in a more triangle-friendly direction, McDermott’s spacing makes for an interesting fit.

In the late lottery of the draft, it’s not always about trying to get stars. Sometimes you want winning pieces and if the Nuggets see a niche role for McDermott, I have little doubt he’ll be a solid rotation piece. Although like many other fans, if some of the top high-upside guys are still on the board I’d like to see the Nuggets take a chance on one of them.

Adreian Payne, PF, Michigan State (Senior)

One of the older players in the draft, Payne is not projected to be in the Nuggets’ range at number 11. He is more of a candidate for mid-to-late first round, but Payne is one of the few true sleepers whom I would have no problem taking a little bit higher.

The reason is simple – Payne might be the most rotation-ready prospect for a team looking to win right away. He is a long, athletic big who knows his role and embraces his stretch four potential.

Brian Shaw tried to install a Pacers-style pick and roll defense last year – having athletic fours hedge hard on the ballhandler while big, physical fives dropped down to protect the rim. As anyone who watched JJ Hickson try to hedge and recover can tell you, this was a disastrous scheme for the Nuggets’ personnel. Hickson and Faried were terrible defenders in space, often looking lost on the periemter while failing to get any pressure on the ball. Shaw eventually settled on more hard traps and switches to better utilize their athleticism, but Denver remained an uncoordinated mess in pick and roll defense all season.

One way to help is to add quicker fours with better defensive instincts. Darrell Arthur was the only option the Nuggets had last season and his effect on Denver’s defensive efficiency was dramatic. Payne is the prototypical quick four to attack pick and rolls the way Brian Shaw wants – forcing the ballhandler away from the middle under constant pressure from mobile bigs who can rotate to close the gaps.

Payne’s three-point shooting is also a bonus absent from Denver’s current bigs, save for Darrell Arthur’s developing long-distance game. Simply put, Aderian Payne looks like one of those invaluable first round steals snatched up by a playoff team targeting a specific need. Payne is a solid option for the Nuggets if they have plans for a trade and want to approach the draft with their immediate playoff goals in mind.

]]>http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/06/24/2014-nba-draft-three-sleeper-picks-for-the-nuggets/feed/24The case for rebuildinghttp://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/06/20/the-case-for-rebuilding/
http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/06/20/the-case-for-rebuilding/#commentsSat, 21 Jun 2014 00:45:04 +0000http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/?p=8949The 2014 NBA Draft edges ever-closer, and with every day more questions emerge. It’s not merely about who to pick (as Kalen is listing so brilliantly in his Prospecting posts this week), or how to go about selecting the best player for Denver in this draft, but what this draft will reveal about the Denver Nuggets’ direction; The Nuggets’ future. With the silly season in full force, the Nuggets are linked to blockbuster trades as well (see: Love, Kevin), but until those actually happen, I will treat them as if they won’t, and treat the roster status as it officially stands today.

Next Thursday, the Nuggets will have a big decision to make. Do they go for a player of need, treating their squad as if it could contend for a deep playoff run with an incremental improvement (and hopefully a lack of injury news)? Do they trade the pick for a veteran player, even including some of their current players? Or do they decide this roster is not going to be championship material, make the painful call to ‘blow it up’ and start again?

First, let’s be clear on one point. Stan Kroenke (and by extension, Josh Kroenke) does not tank. His teams have precisely zero history of sacrificing a whole season to rebuild. He is a business man and always makes sure his teams are doing their absolute best to stay profitable, if not contender material.

That means, quite rationally, that the last option above has hardly been raised at all in recent Nuggets discussions. Of these three options, it is the least likely one by quite some margin. But there is one reason to at least present the hypothesis.

1996.

After a period of playoff appearances led by star players (Alex English, Fat Lever, Kiki Vandeweghe) in the late-1980s, a new lineup was assembled, including Dikembe Mutombo, LaPhonso Ellis, Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf and other talented non-stars. Injuries hampered the experiment, so after a step back in 1995-96 instead of a complete rebuild, three pivotal and fateful decisions were made.

Abdul-Rauf was traded away for famously strong-armed veteran Sarunas Marciulionis and a draft pick that became Jeff McInnis.

The results were absolutely disastrous. While Denver’s original draft pick would become Erick Dampier, the Nuggets themselves picked Efthimi Rentzias, who would go on to play 23 games in the NBA, none of them for Denver. Marcioulionis and McInnis would play a total of 30 games for Denver, and in a thoroughly bizarre turn of events, Jackson and Pierce both left before the next trade deadline, Jackson returning to the same Indiana team he’d played for only eight months earlier. Ervin Johnson was gone before the start of 1997-98.

What was left was a smoking ruin, devoid of any meaningful assets to rebuild a team capable of contending for a spot in the morning queue at McDonald’s, let alone an NBA championship. In a fit of panic, the only valuable player on the team, Antonio McDyess, was traded in the summer of 1998 for five draft picks. Only two of those would ever put on a Denver game jersey, one of whom (Dan McClintock) would only do so six times. Meanwhile, Mutombo, Rose, Jackson, Johnson and Dampier would all play in the NBA Finals in their playing career.

The desert walk would last an agonizing seven years, before the Nuggets finally managed to bottom out and luck out at the same time, when Carmelo Anthony fell into their lap. (Mostly) because of that terrible, terrible summer of 1996, when Denver completely failed to make anything of their wealth of assets and/or utilize any of their draft picks.

Even if only in light of that calamity 18 years ago, we should entertain the notion of looking at the Nuggets’ roster and asking ourselves if it can bring the ultimate trophy to Denver, and how.

Is it by putting those players on the floor and hope they can win it themselves? The answer is difficult to admit for any Nuggets fan, but rationally obvious: No. A fully healthy 2013-14 roster would make it into the second round at best. Is it by adding a promising rookie to fill a lone remaining need to push the team over the top? Sadly not. Is it by trading the pick and a surplus asset or two for a veteran leader? It’s a crapshoot, but history is not on the Nuggets’ side. Apart from the 2008 Boston Celtics, there aren’t many successful examples of this tactic, and even that example included a bona-fide superstar.

Is it maybe, just maybe, by Tim Connelly and Josh Kroenke taking a long, deep breath before acquiring all the lottery picks they can get, leasing professional veterans for a year and hitting the PR circuit to entice future star free agents that they’ll be surrounded by a blend of complementary veterans and young, smart and talented co-stars?

First, we need to look at which draft picks can realistically be acquired. The 2014 draft is loaded with talent, if not superstars. Still, a number of lottery teams are looking to move their picks for proven players. Utah Jazz is reportedly looking to trade out of their #5 spot, the Lakers are apparently open to getting a veteran for their #7 pick and the Kings would love to bypass another year of waiting and get into the 2015 playoffs, so their #8 pick is only lacking a neon-lit “For Sale” sign. A rebuilding Denver team would be doing whatever it could to get at least one or two of these picks.

Here follows a purely hypothetical scenario, executed to the extreme.

First, the Nuggets trade the #11 pick for Chicago’s #16 and #19 picks.

The Jazz: They have young talent at PF and PG already, which would make it possible to trade something like the #16 pick, Kenneth Faried and Wilson Chandler for the #5 pick, and then drafting Noah Vonleh. They could then sign Richard Jefferson for the vet minimum.

The Lakers: First we need to ascertain what the Nuggets would do with the #7 pick. Would it to be pick Doug McDermott (which could make Danilo Gallinari expendable), Julius Randle or Marcus Smart (if he’s still available)? Lights-out shooter Doug McDermott gets the call to complement Vonleh. Gallinari and Fournier or Hickson go to the Lakers with the #19 pick. A player might have to follow the Lakers’ pick to the Nuggets. Insert any expiring contract here.

The Kings: Here it gets emotional. The fan in me loves Ty Lawson. But the analyst in me knows the PG position is the most loaded with talent in the league and the SG position is the scarcest. The Kings trade Isaiah Thomas and the #8 pick for Ty Lawson and the Nuggets’ later second round pick. The Nuggets select Marcus Smart if he’s still on the board or Nik Stauskas if he and Julius Randle are both gone.

If Spencer Dinwiddie is still on the board at #41, he is snapped up.

After the summer, the Nuggets No-Star Experiment is over. Instead, it now consists of the following core:

This team would not make the playoffs in 2015. That much is obvious. 30 wins would be a massive achievement, in fact. But the immense talent is there, ready to blossom and even potentially attract one of the 2015 star free agents. They will be molded by a good player developer in Brian Shaw. Any star, short of LeBron, would have to take a long, hard look at this roster before deciding they wouldn’t just have a chance of going very, very far indeed with a supporting cast like this (or close to it). Add in a high 2015 draft pick (a talented big like Willie Cauley-Stein, Kristaps Porzingis or Karl Towns wouldn’t be a bad shout) and the Nuggets will suddenly have built a team on their own terms (or my imaginary ones).

As rebuilding scenarios go, this represents an extreme, simplified, idealized one. That caveat cannot be emphasized enough. This may be a highly unlikely prospect. It may also be unrealistic to many. It may very well be worse than splashing out for fantasy monster Kevin Love or continuing the incremental development of the existing core. Myself, I’m far from convinced about the tactic of rebuilding at all. If the San Antonio Spurs have shown us anything, it’s that lasting success is built on cultivating a winning culture above anything else; be it huge risks, tanking for draft luck or superstar signings.

But however realistic (or not) this scenario is, it couldn’t possibly be worse than the summer of 1996, could it?

What’s your opinion on the option of rebuilding? Is it better/worse than the team’s current options? Sound off in the comments.

]]>http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/06/20/the-case-for-rebuilding/feed/9Prospecting: In search of a shooting starhttp://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/06/09/prospecting-in-search-of-a-shooting-star/
http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/06/09/prospecting-in-search-of-a-shooting-star/#commentsMon, 09 Jun 2014 23:03:49 +0000http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/?p=8882As many fans are well aware by now, there are four excellent shooting guard prospects in the upcoming draft slated to be available with the Nuggets’ first overall selection: Gary Harris, Nik Stauskas, Zach LaVine and James Young. While personal preference dictates where exactly these players will fall on draft night, the virtual consensus amongst the Web’s most revered mock analysts is that all four are likely to fall in the top 20. So while the Nuggets should (and likely will) implement the Best Player Available (BPA) strategy, there stands a legitimate chance that one of the aforementioned names will be called to the stage when Adam Silver announces the 11th pick — not because the Nuggets need a starting-caliber shooting guard, but because these players are all more than deserving of that selection. Naturally, understanding which of these players would make the best pick is of critical importance; which, as you might have guessed, is exactly what I’ll attempt below.

Nik Stauskas // 20 // 6-6 // SG // Michigan

If for some reason the Nuggets were dead set on taking a pure shooter, this guy would be their selection — hand down, without question. As I’ve stated a few times in the past month, Stauskas might be the best shooter to declare for the NBA seen since Klay Thompson or Steph Curry. His release is tight and consistent, while his range extends well beyond the NBA 3-point line. But what I like most about Stauskas’ shot is that he can get it off anywhere, anytime. Whether it be coming off screens, in isolation, driving to the basket or simply finding an open corner, Stauskas firmly understands the art of shot creation.

The other thing I like about Stauskas is his intelligence. Stauskas possesses high basketball IQ, has not an ounce of selfishness in his body and is in tuned with the nuances of team basketball that are of paramount importance when it comes to succeeding in the NBA. And for teams that value outside shooting, above-average distribution skills and a willingness to play defense (i.e., the San Antonio Spurs), Stauskas is all you could ever want in a late lottery selection.

Detractors might point towards his athleticism and defensive capabilities as omens that he’ll struggle in the NBA, but those are highly erroneous arguments. First off, Stauskas is an athlete. There were times while watching him last year that I was blown away by not only dunks, but monster jams. For what he’ll be asked to do at the next level, Stauskas has more than enough athleticism to hang with the big boys. As for defense, Stauskas is no lock-down defender but he’s shown an ability to play admirable defense in large spells as well as an overall commitment to that end of the floor, which is more than a lot of collegians can say.

Conclusion: I like Stauskas — a lot. He’s got an elite skill (shooting), requisite athleticism so succeed as an outside shooter at the next level, savvy distribution skills and a good head on his shoulders, all of which adds up to star potential. I’m not saying he’ll ever become a star in the NBA, but he certainly has the tools to get there. If nothing else, his shooting alone should carve a very long and successful career at the next level, which is something the Nuggets would be wise to benefit from.

Zach LaVine // 19 // 6-6 // SG // UCLA

Speaking of star potential, have you heard of Zach LaVine? If you follow the draft in any capacity the answer is “yes,” and subsequent chances are that you have a very polarizing opinion of him.

LaVine is the type of guy who makes or breaks a GM. His potential is through the roof but the sample size in which to analyze him is extremely limited and teeming with question marks. On one hand you salivate over LaVine’s physical attributes, how he comes equipped with unlimited athleticism, great size and length for his position as well as a fluid shooting stroke. On the other hand are the games, his mercurial shooting performances and selfish decision making that are the epitome of red flags in the scouting world. Had LaVine displayed better basketball IQ throughout the season, he’d likely be a top 10 pick. Unfortunately he did quite the opposite, displaying a glut of head-scratching malfunctions which are best summarized by YouTube comments like, “Wow. Those are some horrible weaknesses.”

The biggest problem (or strength, depending on how you look at it) with LaVine is that everything we’ll come to know about him a few years down the road will be determined after he’s drafted. Unlike freshman phenoms or upper classmen — who register extensive and impressive bodies of work — LaVine has almost nothing to show for his lone college season at UCLA. He shot the ball well for a few weeks to start the season (then promptly no better than 40 percent from anywhere on the floor), had a few jaw-dropping dunks and did a nice job of running the break throughout the year. That’s it. Therefore, if you draft LaVine you’re solely drafting him based on what he has a chance to become. It’s an incredibly risky undertaking, but if it pays off it could help a team like the Nuggets forgo the rebuilding process and jump straight to contending out west.

What’s really steamrolled LaVine’s momentum lately has been his workouts. He blew people away at the NBA Draft Combine in Chicago, registering top marks in virtually all the most revered athletic testing categories, and has since impressed in verbal interviews and shooting drills. LaVine has slowly become a fast riser (oxymoronic as it may sound) and if recent history has taught us anything it’s that these types, who skyrocket up draft boards once athletic testing begins (i.e., Russell Westbrook, Damian Lillard, Victor Oladipo, even Kenneth Faried, who was projected as a second rounder for most of the year prior to private workouts), tend to fare pretty damn well in the NBA.

Conclusion: I’ve ruminated about the idea of drafting LaVine for weeks now (ask me about him later and you’ll probably get a completely different answer) and each time I turn him over in my head my deliberation cycle returns to one essential question: Exactly how many negative attributes does LaVine possess that would hinder his success at the next level? The answer: not many. He may not be the most cerebral player on the floor (yet), he may be somewhat selfish (right now), somewhat inconsistent (thus far)… BUT WHO ISN’T AT 19?!?! As I stated above, this is not about who LaVine is now; it’s about who he’ll become three years down the road, playing against the best athletes in the world, supervised by the best coaches in the word. Even at 19 all signs point towards LaVine being an intelligent enough kid (he’s doing well in interviews) with a strong work ethic and willingness to learn and improve. Add that to his already freakish athleticism, size, length, shooting stroke and unlimited potential, and you have the recipe for a Grade-A superstud at the next level. I just hope whichever GM selects him on draft night has either nepotism, piousness or a strong non-basketball hobby going for them in case LaVine is exactly what he’s shown to be in games.

Gary Harris // 19 // 6-4 // SG // Michigan State

Harris has been RMC’s No. 1 shooting guard prospect for a while now — and judging by his recent private workout with the Nuggets, he’s somewhere atop their list as well.

The reasons for Harris’ deference are two-fold: one fold being offense, the other defense. Unlike most prospects in any draft — and most of the ones we’ll be analyzing this month in preparation for the upcoming draft — Harris is a true “two-way”player, meaning his defense is just as much a part of his overall game as his offense. He’s the type of guy you won’t ever have to encourage to play defense; he’ll just do it because that’s who he is. In today’s NBA that attribute is as valuable as any outside of holding superstar status.

In addition to defense, Harris possesses a well-rounded offensive game mostly predicated on manufacturing space to execute his gossamer jump shot. He’s also a talented slasher who understands the value of penetration in order to spread the floor, yet often times whatever drives he makes are only prerequisites to pulling up for a jump shot.

While Harris’ jump shot and defense are his two characteristics likely to draw the most publicity, what has always appealed to me most when watching him in games is his presence of mind on the floor. Harris is smart. Similar to his defense, you’ll never have to actively persuade him to play with more intelligence, more awareness, more selflessness. Though he’s projected to be a two guard at the next level, Harris has always played with a point guard mentality: finding the open man, dishing out incisive dimes, making whatever altruistic play is necessary for his team to succeed. During his last few seasons at Michigan State there were times I was almost in awe at some of the passes he made, which are usually true signs of an excellent basketball player and potentially elite shooting guard.

If you want to pick him apart you could point to Harris’ size as an issue. He’s barely 6-4 in shoes and has only a 6-7 wingspan. He’s also criticized for mediocre athleticism (even though he’s built like a freight train). To me, these bullet points seem persnickety, like people are trying to find fault in him rather than acknowledging that some players simply lack the same number of drawbacks as others. As the great Michael Lewis once said, “If you look long enough for an argument against reason you will find it.” In a player like Harris’ case, this quote could not ring more true, as his shortcomings have never stood out as reasons he wouldn’t succeed at the next level. This is not to say Harris doesn’t have peccadilloes. Like everybody in the world outside of John Green, he’s not perfect. But that’s exactly my point. Harris isn’t Dwyane Wade. He’s certainly no Kobe Bryant. Hell, he might never even be as good as Bradley Beal. But if you’re looking for a starting two guard who’s passionate about defense and possesses a robust mix of intelligence and court vision, look no further than Gary Harris.

Conclusion: It’s anyone’s guess as to what will happen on draft night. Every year, no matter what we think will unfold, it never plays out that way. I don’t know if Harris will be gone by the Nuggets selection and I don’t know what other, more highly valued players will be available if he’s still on the board. All I know is that outside of Dario Saric and Aaron Gordon — the two players most likely to slip on draft night, according to the “experts” — there is nobody I value more than Harris. This isn’t to say I wouldn’t approve of the Nuggets selecting one of the other three shooting guards in this post; I’d be more than happy if one of them fell to the Nuggets. All I’m saying is that I value Harris a little bit more than all the others. Just a bit.

James Young // 18 // 6-7 // SG // Kentucky

Ever see a movie you can’t stop talking about because you liked it so much, yet every time you try to engage your friends or family about it they just shrug their shoulders and say, “Eh, it was alright”? That’s exactly how I feel about James Young.

Like Harris, I see Young as a total-package type of player. He gets tons of criticism for not having elite athleticism, not being ambidextrous, not focusing in on defense enough at Kentucky under the incredibly demanding John Calipari, not being as consistent of an outside shooter as everyone would have liked and so on down the line. It seems like every time I read or hear about James Young people are focusing on nothing but the negatives. And that’s somewhat understandable, as Young did make lots of mistakes his freshman year. But when you consider he’s a full year younger than the average college freshman, still put up 14 points per game in the SEC, was the second best player on an extremely talented team that went all the way to the national championship game and still shot a respectable 35 percent from beyond the arc his lone year at Kentucky, I think Young possesses quite a lot of impressive qualities and accomplishments the myopic pessimists are overlooking.

The reason Young gets so much flack is because he’s an easy target. He was the Mario Chalmers of his Kentucky team. When something went wrong, no matter how much another player or even the entire team was at fault, it was always easiest to blame Young. After all, he was the youngest, the slowest to pick up on Calipari’s defensive schemes and the one who took the most shots. That right there is an unadulterated formula for undeserved blame if there ever was any.

For whatever reason, I never saw things that same way with Young. I always knew he was youthful for his class, and so I guess I tempered my expectations a bit. Still, I was often far more impressed with Young than I was discouraged. Because Kentucky was on national TV a lot last year, I watched Young a lot last year, and from my perspective he was right up there with Julius Randle in terms of overall importance to his team. This sentiment was then corroborated by collegiate voters who named Young to the All-NCAA Tournament Final Four team during Kentucky’s run to the national title game.

If Zach LaVine is potential mixed with risk, Young is potential accompanied with a near guarantee. I would be absolutely shocked if he didn’t turn out to be a starter or sixth man at the next level. He already has the shooting stoke (fluid, compact, quick release, etc.), rebounding prowess and passing instincts to secure him a long future in the NBA. He already has the athleticism. He’s displayed the precociousness. He’s proven himself at the college level. Now all Young really has to do is grow up. Once he improves his handle, becomes more consciousness overall when dribbling and dedicates himself to the defensive side of the ball, there’s no telling how far this kid could go.

Conclusion:After Gary Harris I’d endorse James Young as my favorite shooting guard prospect in the draft. He wont’ turn 19 till August (!), already stands 6-7 with a 7-foot wingspan, was the second best player on the second best team in the country last year, was a consensus top-10 recruit coming out of high school and can flat out splash it from downtown. And did I mention he doesn’t turn 19 till August?

]]>http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/06/09/prospecting-in-search-of-a-shooting-star/feed/29Roundball Roundtable: One fan’s offseason wish listhttp://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/05/28/roundball-roundtable-one-fans-offseason-wish-list/
http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/05/28/roundball-roundtable-one-fans-offseason-wish-list/#commentsWed, 28 May 2014 18:33:10 +0000http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/?p=8860Every now and then Roundball Mining Company receives a fan e-mail worthy of more than just a quick read and response. Last week such a letter was sent our way from avid RMC reader and loyal Nuggets fan, Joe Karlik. In his message (presented below in italics) Joe outlined three main moves he felt the Nuggets needed to make this summer to put themselves in a position of success this upcoming season. Joe kindly asked for our thoughts on these issues, to which we’ve obliged his request in the form of our latest Roundball Roundtable. As always, feel free to leave your thoughts on the following subjects in the comments section below.

1) Trade J.J. Hickson

How many power forwards do the Nuggets need? Faried established himself as “The Guy” in the second half of the season, developing an ability to put the ball in the hoop without an Andre Miller alley-oop. (I was very down on Faried early in the season and was an advocate of trading him, but he made great strides and now I think the Nuggets need to re-sign him.) Darrell Arthur is an important rotation player who is far more valuable than Hickson. And my optimistic personality thinks that Arthur will work hard on extending his shooting ability to the 3-point line which will make him even more valuable. And then you think about the ability for Gallo to play small-ball four. Although he does some nice things and brings energy, Hickson is far too inconsistent and redundant on this roster, especially with Faried.

Tom: Agree? No. Why? Hickson probably shouldn’t play more than spot minutes behind Faried and Arthur when healthy, and when injured he’s just taking up a roster spot and some cap room. But the Nuggets don’t need the roster spot or the cap room until next offseason, so why pay some other team to take him right now? (Other) Possible Targets: Wait for Hickson to be healthy and some other team’s power forward to be injured, and then trade him for an expiring contract.

Charlie:Agree? Yes. Why? I cringed seeing Hickson forced into a big role night after night while more effective players like Timofey Mozgov and Darrell Arthur watched from the sidelines. Hickson had a profound negative effect on most lineups and the Nuggets proved they have quality frontcourt depth after he went down with an injury. He could be hard to move but the Nuggets would be wise to balance out their roster by removing the most extraneous bits. Hickson could still make sense for a team like the Brooklyn Nets instead of continuing to provide redundant depth with the Nuggets. (Other) Possible Targets: Cap relief, draft assets or expiring contracts. The Nuggets will be better off admitting their mistake and moving ahead with a more-than-adequate front court.

Vytis:Agree? Yes. Why? I’m one of the biggest J.J. Hickson critics and was against signing him in the first place, so I’m all for having him off the team. However, he will be coming off a serious injury and at this point I don’t see the Nuggets getting anything for him. If they could load him off onto a team for nothing or even squeeze out a second-round pick, I’d be happy. But I think Denver likes him and won’t move him even though the Nuggets’ frontcourt is going to be very crowded next season. (Other) Possible Targets: Anything that doesn’t jeopardize the team’s future flexibility.

Joel:Agree? Yes. Why? I’m agreeing in principle because I do think it’s a high priority for the Nuggets to get Hickson off their roster. His signing was Connelly’s worst move thus far, and his contract and roster spot inhibit Denver’s flexibility in doing things like extending Faried and signing free agents. That said, moving a defensive nightmare with a torn ACL may be near impossible in the short term, and the Nuggets may well have better opportunities to flip a Hickson trade at the deadline after he (hopefully) has proven he can still play. (Other) PossibleTargets: If Connelly can swing anything of value in return for Hickson it should be considered gravy. The “target” should be increased minutes for Faried, Arthur, and perhaps even Chandler at the four, and even if nothing more than cap relief is received in return the Nuggets should consider themselves lucky.

2) Trade Wilson Chandler

This is the one tradeable guy who might have value on the open market. His contract is rather team friendly, but on a team that is handcuffed because of so many mid-level contracts, his becomes expendable. I’m hot and cold on Chandler. There are times where he looks like a lock-down defender and legitimate third scoring option, but sometimes he gets so three happy and shoots the Nuggets out of games. He’s good depth at small forward, but personally I think Quincy Miller can develop enough to become the backup three.

Tom:Agree? No. Why? When Chandler played alongside Gallinari and Iguodala a year ago he gave opposing teams fits on both ends of the court. If Gallinari is healthy and the Nuggets can pick up an athletic, defensive-minded shooting guard in the draft, Chandler can again be an X-factor as a backup three and stretch four. (Other) Possible Targets: If the team decides to move Chandler, why not bring back Afflalo? The salaries are similar, and Orlando could have a crowded backcourt if they draft Exum.

Charlie:Agree? No. Why? Chandler is the most sensible trade chip on the roster but I can’t help thinking the Nuggets are dealing him from a position of weakness, much like they are with the injured Danilo Gallinari. Chandler still has a place on a Brian Shaw team and stands to be more effective if he can remain healthy. After missing training camp and being sidelined with various injuries all year, Chandler never got going. Denver should explore a Chandler-Gallo pairing before being desperate to part with one of their better assets. (Other) Possible Targets: A better player on a more sensible contract. There aren’t a lot out there readily attainable in a trade for the oft-injured but productive Chandler.

Vytis:Agree? No. Why? Again, it depends on what you can get for Chandler, but I don’t think you can get much at this point. He had a mediocre season, which means that a potential return in a deal would likely also be mediocre. I think keeping him around and letting him boost his market value could make him a more attractive trading chip in the future, especially since the last year of his deal is a team option. (Other) Possible Targets: A reliable two-way shooting guard wouldn’t hurt. Randy Foye did a decent job as a starter last year, but you probably need someone better to make the playoffs.

Joel:Agree? No. Why? I understand the logic behind the argument for trading Chandler, and I am definitely not opposed to trading him if a good opportunity arises. But as of yet I’m less than confident in the ability of Miller and Fournier to fill the ostensible hole left by Wilson’s departure. At this point it’s fair to say that Chandler was a disappointment last season, but to me that doesn’t mean he isn’t valuable –- he’s just less valuable than many of us thought he was. Alongside Gallinari in 2012-13 he was part of Denver’s best defensive lineups, and while it seems now he’s more of a bench player than a starter, nearly any NBA team could do much worse for a backup small forward. (Other) Possible Targets: It’s very difficult to name specific trade targets for Chandler when I don’t think he necessarily should be traded, so in lieu of that I will say that at least one of two prerequisites should be met: 1) He’s packaged with Denver’s first-round pick to move up in the draft so they can acquire a true impact player; or 2) whatever trade he’s involved in brings Denver back a competent backup three.

3) Get an athletic shooting guard in the draft

I think both Gary Harris and Nik Stauskas will be available at 11. Either of these guys would be a great fit in the starting lineup with Lawson and Gallo. I personally like the ability and potential of Stauskas handling the ball so Lawson can play stretches at the two. But I think Harris would be a great pick as well. The Nuggets have depth at the three, four and five, and moving Foye to the bench will then create depth at the point. Two guard is the biggest need. I still hope Fournier develops into the right-handed Manu, but it will take more than the small step he took from year one to year two.

Tom:Agree? Yes. Why? This is both an area of need for the Nuggets, and an area of strength in this draft. It’s up to the Nuggets’ scouts, executives and coaches to figure out which guy has the right physical tools and mentality to be the shooting guard of the future, and then mold him into that. (Other) Possible Targets: Nik Stauskas, Gary Harris, Zach LaVine, James Young.

Charlie:Agree? No. Why? It is imperative to keep an open mind about drafting at number 11. Denver is within range of so many good prospects and if past drafts are any indication, expect the unexpected when it comes to the lottery. It just so happens this draft is heavy on the Nuggets biggest need with so many good wing players. However, there are just too many unknowns in a deep draft and number 11 is simply no place to draft for need. (Other) Possible Targets: Tentatively, I’ll go Harris, Stauskas, Young and LaVine. Vonleh and Gordon are can’t-miss if something crazy happens and one of them slips. Saric or McDermott slipping here is also something the Nuggets must be prepared for. A wing should be the best opportunity here but it’s far from a sure thing.

Vytis:Agree? Maybe. Why? I don’t follow college basketball enough, so it’s hard to say. I’m aware of how good the top guys are, but it’s apparently a pretty deep draft as well. The smartest thing to do would be to keep your options open and take the best talent available. If it’s an athletic two-guard it obviously wouldn’t hurt. (Other) Possible Targets: N/A.

Joel:Agree? Yes. Why? First off, I will qualify my agreement by saying that, while I agree that shooting guard is Denver’s greatest position of need, I don’t think that athleticism is necessarily a prerequisite. Among twos who may be in Denver’s draft range, neither Gary Harris nor Nik Stauskas have off-the-charts athleticism, but both have other skills (defense in Harris’ case, shooting in Stauskas’) which could prove to be just as valuable, if not more so, to the Nuggets. The appeal of athleticism, and the potential upside it promises, is understandable. But it can also lure teams into drafting players like Evan Turner and Nick Young. (Other) Possible Targets: Nate Robinson and Aaron Brooks (even if he re-signs) are not long for the Nuggets. Among the fan discussions that I’ve seen, point guard is an overlooked future need. It’s not only at the two, but at the guard position in general that Denver lacks depth going forward. If he’s still unclaimed when Denver’s number comes up, Gary Harris appears to be their best option in terms of having the best combination of combo guard abilities, defense, range and basketball IQ.

]]>http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/05/28/roundball-roundtable-one-fans-offseason-wish-list/feed/843-on-3: Early NBA Draft forcasthttp://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/05/11/3-on-3-early-nba-draft-forcast/
http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/2014/05/11/3-on-3-early-nba-draft-forcast/#commentsMon, 12 May 2014 03:38:45 +0000http://www.roundballminingcompany.com/?p=8806With the NBA Draft Combine scheduled to kick off this week, the Draft Lottery taking place the following week and individual workouts to commence shortly thereafter, the time to talk 2014 NBA Draft has officially arrived. We’ll get into more detailed player analysis as the draft approaches (after all, we’re still six weeks away from June 26), but to get our draft coverage underway at Roundball Mining Company we offer first an appetizer — a piquant sampler of strategies and potential selections to watch for in the coming draft, all in 3-on-3 form. As always, we invite you to leave your input in the comments section below by posting your answers to the following questions as well.

1. What type of strategy do you expect from Tim Connelly on draft night and what will his first-round pick say about his legacy moving forward?

Kalen: Connelly has stated multiple times recently that he’s going to be aggressive this offseason. While I have no reason to disbelieve him, I’m also cognizant of how rare it is for teams to move back in the lottery. Given the lack of vacancy on the Nuggets roster, I could see Connelly using the team’s current first-round pick then trading the Nuggets’ two second-round picks away for future assets or a player to be named. But no matter how far he moves either way, this draft is going to serve as a template for the types of players Connelly covets — as well as his overall competence as a talent evaluator.

Charlie: I expect Connelly to be very aggressive on draft night, whether it’s using the Nuggets’ first lottery selection in a decade or making a splash via trade. Unlike last year’s No. 27 pick, essentially a throwaway first-rounder in a weak draft, Denver is holding onto a real asset with their late lottery selection (currently slated at No. 11). It is perhaps the most valuable tool the Nuggets can use to improve themselves this summer and a crucial test for the young Tim Connelly.

William: I fully expect Connelly to do his best to make the team as good as possible, as fast as possible. The chances of getting into the top three are fanciful at best, so I’m assuming the Nuggets will stay at No. 11 in the draft. Barring a complete demolition job this summer, this draft will be about finding a player that can contribute immediately and, 10 years from now, the Nuggets can be proud to tell other teams they stole in this draft. This is a big test for Connelly and co. They could get a Klay Thompson kind of guy (No. 11 in 2011) or an Acie Law (No. 11 in 2005) kind of guy. We can only wait and see.

2. Disregarding the BPA (Best Player Available) strategy, what skill set, asset or position (i.e. small forward, wing defender, shooter, etc.) do the Nuggets need most with their first pick in the draft?

Kalen: As currently constructed, the Nuggets aren’t really lacking anything definitive outside of a starting-caliber shooting guard. They could use more defense across the board, as well as another low-post threat and decent shooter, but most of those problems should be addressed when players that were injured this year return next year. The great thing about the Nuggets’ need for a legit shooting guard is that this draft is loaded with them, especially those slated to be drafted somewhere in the early to mid-teens. Quite honestly, I’d be a little surprised if the Nuggets didn’t select a shooting guard at No. 11.

Charlie: The obvious answer is a wing defender, a shooting specialist or perhaps a young point guard. But more than anything, the Nuggets just need impact players and more talent across the board. Denver is a team with no star and a well-paid core that is already peaking. Up to this point, Connelly has made it his number one priority to surround that with low-ceiling role players and veterans. The next step is for the Nuggets to create value with a legit prospect on a rookie deal — something they don’t currently have which might ultimately help them in the long term.

William: They need a guy who can shoot consistently, be able to defend (at least) and most of all, they need a smart player. Athletic, immature players are a dime a dozen these days, especially with the wretched one-and-done college system, so getting a player who has the smarts to develop beyond an impressive vertical jump or standing reach is paramount. With Mozgov and Faried complementing each other down low and the drive-happy Gallo and Lawson on the wings, a good, versatile shooter is a priority.

3. Which player slated by most mock drafts to go after No. 10 — as of right now — do you particularly like for the Nuggets and why?

Kalen: In years past, because the Nuggets always selected so far back in the first round, most of the really good players were already off the board and I could narrow down a small crop of prospects I liked to “My Guy” — the one player I liked far more than others. But this year is different. There’s at least a handful of players who could potentially be my guy. I’m not going to include Aaron Gordon or Dario Saric on this list (at least not now) because I think they’ll both be gone before the Nuggets’ select at 11; therefore, like Charlie and William, I’m going to select two other players: Gary Harris and James Young. To me, Harris should be “The Guy” Nuggets fans root for on draft night barring a slide by higher-ranked players. He’s a young, smart, athletic, two-way shooting guard who can stretch the floor, find the open man and lock down his opponent on defense. I really think Harris is going to be special at the next level. On the other hand, James Young is mostly in the same mold as Harris except even younger, but not quite as good on defense — though he certainly has the ability to be a good defender on the right team. To me, Young might have the most upside of all the talented two guards slated to drop in the mid-lottery.

Charlie: I am going to cheat and mention two players. The first is Gary Harris, a player almost certain to be there at 11 who looks like a safe bet and great fit in a number of ways. He reminds me of a hybrid Bradley Beal and Arron Afflalo, immediately bringing toughness on the perimeter which Shaw has openly pined for since the season ended. Harris also doesn’t need the ball, doesn’t turn it over and could develop into the catch-and-shoot threat the Nuggets lack. The second player is Dario Saric, the 6-10 Croatian forward who was pure hype and potential one year ago. It’s impossible to ignore what he did this season, dominating overseas and proving he’s an elite prospect with talent that rivals the best in the draft. He’s waffled in and out of the draft numerous times and is not a safe bet to come stateside right away, so falling out of the top 10 in a deep draft is a real possibility. If he slips to the Nuggets, the “best talent” mandate should make it very difficult to pass on a player of his caliber.

William: Two names have been floated a bit already: Gary Harris and Nik Stauskas. Harris is a very promising wing defender, with an NBA-ready body and the ability to put a few points on the board. Stauskas is a fantastic shooter, extremely driven (but not as volatile as Lance Stephenson, for example) and smart enough to become a good team defender. I’d be very happy to see either of them in powder blue (or canary gold). Every time I watched Stauskas this year, I was more and more impressed with the guy. But one player I’ve been warming on lately is Doug McDermott. He’d be the smartest player under 25 in the whole league as of opening night and would make a fantastic shooting guard. At 6-8 and able to score from anywhere, he could absolutely bully the preciously scarce field of good twos within two years. And if the shooting guard experiment doesn’t work out, you’ve got a very good small forward who could do stretches of tall ball at two or small ball at the four. If Cleveland haven’t taken him by 10, I’d be on McDermott like a hobo on a sandwich.